On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 01:50:41PM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I was also having a look at the filter specs and I think we should have > more flexibility for setting other criteria such as the following: > > 1) Whether to allow full TS packet or just payload through.
That's the funtionality of the current PES filter (DMX_OUT_TAP) (which doesn't guarantee packet alignment for read() calls). > 2) Whether to allow duplicate TS packets or to discard them. > 3) Whether to allow or discard TS packets with error flag set. That's rather special purpose, but worth supporting. > 4) Whether to match TS packets with the payload unit start indicator > set (after which all packets would be matched). That's too easy to do in userspace (or, in the future, in the DMA-to-hdd handler). Just throw away the first few TS packets. > 5) Whether to match on TS packet priorities. What's that? Or, rather, what is the transport_priority field used for in real-life applications? > 6) Whether to allow/disallow TS packets with adaptation field > through. That's maybe worth supporting. > I suppose we could add these options to the "flag" field in the filter > structs if we wanted to or just have some other IOCTLs to setup the policy. > What do you think? IMHO a "flags" field in (the now mis-named) struct dmx_pes_filter_params would be fine. Regards, Johannes -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.